Lance Armstrong Guilty & Banned…

24082012

Lance at the Tour de France…

Lance Armstrong decided not to fight the charges the USADA brought against him and was found guilty of doping and banned from the sport for life. His Tour de France wins may be stripped from him as well as his other wins from that era. You can click on the image above to read an article over at Velonews on the subject. By not fighting the charges he avoided having all the testimony against him end up in the news and managed to save his image to some degree. He knows what the folks who were going to testify would say and his lawyers would have advised him what his chances were at coming out of that process without being found guilty. One thing you gotta agree on about LA is that he surrounds himself with experts and uses their advice to make smart choices.

As for the issue of his doping past it’s not a surprise to anyone who watched the pro racing of that era. Almost every other contemporary with a shot at the podium at the Tour has been found guilty of doping. In the current peleton Contador has been stripped of his last Tour win and a Shleck has been charged with doping. To believe LA was one of the only top pros not doping despite all of this and a retinue of witnesses ready to testify for the USADA is ridiculous. On the other hand it does change the landscape within which we judge LA’s actions. Everybody was doing it. It’s still going on today.

Kudos to the USADA for having the courage to go after Lance. With the UCI, the US Government and the US public behind LA that was a brave choice. Building a case by collecting evidence through witness statements and uncovering documents is far harder than getting a doping positive, but as we’ve seen the professional cycling peleton can take a load of doping products and pass all sorts of laboratory controls without getting caught. The guys that do get caught didn’t start doping that morning just before the race. They were doping for a while and finally didn’t follow the right protocols of dosage and timings or got surprised by a test they weren’t expecting. So when LA gives his “I was the most tested athlete in the peleton.” speech I just roll my eyes and my inside voice says “With the best doping doctors in the world on your staff.” USADA charged that LA’s team had managed to get a TdeF doping positive suppressed back in 1999. I hope we hear what happened in that case. It might shed more light on how LA kept things rolling for so long without getting caught. It might also explain why the UCI was so unhappy with USADA’s pursuit of LA; they may well be implicated in the cover up.

It’s funny when you read folks criticizing the USADA for taking up the LA case as if they are doing it to an innocent man for some evil reason. On one hand you have a pro athlete in a sport rife with doping who can help himself and his team generate millions of dollars of profit as well as build himself up as a huge celebrity on the other you have some guys at the USADA paid modest salaries who are responsible for enforcing the WADA code. They will never be famous, they won’t make millions and they’ll make a lot of enemies in the process of pursuing LA. Not to mention they have to face two panels of independent arbitrators with their evidence including the at the well respected CAS if the athlete challenges the charges. Note that LA didn’t want to face these arbitrators and have them hear the evidence which is why he gave up the fight.

Will this change anything? One benefit of Lance getting banned is that the doping fairy tale of LA’s career won’t be there to let young racers fool themselves into thinking they’ll get away with doping if they are smart about it. On the other hand people are greedy and they want fame and fortune. In a challenging sport like cycling there will always be the temptation to cheat by doping. We continue to charge and convict murderers even though we know it won’t stop folks killing other folks. Doping won’t stop in cycling, but the more energy we spend fighting it the less successful doping will occur.

Like this:

Related

Actions

Information

42 responses

Unlike most people I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other about Lance. Yeah, he was probably doping but so was just about everybody else. What are you gonna do?

I’d rather see the massive amount of time and resources put towards keeping current and future athletes clean rather than going after stuff in the past.

As far as stripping his TDF titles I am not sure there is a point. Almost every rider on the seven podiums with him was either sanctioned or at least strongly implicated in doping during around that time of career.

Who are you going to give it to? Ullrich? Vino? Basso? Giving one of these guys the title would be further embarrassment for the sport of cycling. I wouldn’t be surprised if the UCI doesn’t follow through, especially since they’re not happy about the USADA stepping on their toes.

I’m glad things work much differently in a criminal case. I have no love for Armstrong but the case and “evidence” built against him was very suspect. They all did it, most have admitted as much, I just don’t like the disparate treatment.

24082012

Pete(11:13:39) :

I could care less about this particular case, but what strikes me as delusional is the posturing of ANY member of the pro cycling community to say that there is any “purity” in the sport left to police, or defend. I have never followed racing, but even I know the everyone has doped, does dope, and will continue to dope. Just stop pretending that the sport is anything else. For that matter, just make it legal and let em go….

24082012

Sean (aka Bigger Dummy)(11:26:51) :

the sad thing is this just proves that no matter how much PED testing is done, the tests are as yet ineffective in detecting doping and deterring it.

I hope this vindicates Frankie & Betty Andreau, Tyler Hamilton and even Floyd Landis to some degree.

24082012

Micheal Blue(11:59:59) :

Vik, I agree with your post. Nobody should get away with doping, regardless of how far in the past. These people (pro cyclists) are in the spotlight and in many cases are role models for kids and even adults.
BTW, Vik, very soon I will be ordering a Tikit. I’m leaning towards Season Tikit with Nexus 8, but the lack of high gearing makes me wonder. Another option is to go for the derailleur one. Reasonable high gear, but not much of low gear. Oh well…

Ben wrote: “I’m glad things work much differently in a criminal case. I have no love for Armstrong but the case and “evidence” built against him was very suspect.”

At this point you and I don’t know what the evidence was. LA does and the USADA does. Had LA decided to fight the charges he would have had a hearing with 3 independent arbitrators and is he didn’t like the outcome he could appeal to CAS which would provide a new hearing with 3 new independent arbitrators.

I really can’t see what’s not fair about this or how this is radically different than a trial by judge. Ultimately LA decided that he didn’t want to face the evidence against him and essentially pleaded guilty accepting the ban.

For a guy that fought his doping allegations at every turn the only thing that makes sense to me is that LA figured he had more to lose by the world hearing the evidence against him than by accepting the punishment and keeping the evidence quiet.

He gets to keep his millions and his celebrity status. A lot of fans won’t believe or don’t care he doped. The punishment is mostly to his legacy.

Sean wrote: “the sad thing is this just proves that no matter how much PED testing is done, the tests are as yet ineffective in detecting doping and deterring it.”

For all the doctors and scientists trying to improve drug testing there are others trying to improve the ways to cheat. By making the doping techniques tougher at least it limits how much benefit can be achieved and the cost to do so.

We don’t know the evidence against him at this point. I hope we do get a look at it. I doubt they have much not provided by the fed investigation. I do believe he did it but there is the burden of proof. Testimony from other participants is hardly damping evidence.
The thing that bothers me is where are all the other lifetime bans? Why aren’t the other confirmed U.S. dopers career results wiped out? Why was it so important to get one rider forgiving all the others for their crimes. It all seems so personal and pathetic.

@Ben – Tyler and Floyd have both been sanctioned for doping. I’m not up to date on if they’ve been banned for life or not. Some of the guys on US Postal that agreed to testify against LA may have cut deals so they wouldn’t be banned or for reduced sentences. That’s pretty normal in the legal system to cut deals with lesser criminals to get the big fish.

Now that LA is taken care of Bruneeyl is up next and who knows who might be charged next. They went after LA first because he was the most important rider they had evidence against.

LA isn’t being singled out for doping just look at the list of riders charged and found guilty in the last 5 years. It’s hardly a witch hunt against one personality when virtually all his contemporaries have been found guilty as well.

25082012

Ben(10:37:09) :

I didnt claim he was being singled out, thats not the issue. Floyd and Tyler were sanctioned (after they were caught) and received bans that allowed them to return to racing. No lifetime bans, their career results were not stripped and there was actual evidence in those cases. Cutting deals works to get a bigger criminal, but LA is no more guilty than the smaller fish. Doping is doping.
It’s as if the entire class is suspected of cheating on a test, but the teacher is only concerned with the guilt of the kid that got the best grade. As long as you tell the teacher what they want to hear about that one kid then you are forgiven and get back to class.
LA hasn’t been treated differently? Check out who’s riding in UT and Spain right now. riders who actually failed tests and admitted dopers, where is their lifetime ban?
My argument isn’t that I feel LAs punishment is undue or too severe. But rather those who were actually proven to commit the same crime were treated much differently.
Some people want LA to go down so badly that they aren’t concerned with what is actually happening here.

Doping is one of pro road racings longest held traditions. The only thing more boring than watching a road race, is watching one where the riders dont dope. I never Liked Lance much, mostly because of his arrogance. As far as I see it he got what he deserved. If you can say anything for him is he put alot of hope, money and time in a cause for some very sick people. Very few pro atheletes can say that.
I really do like how the Europeans take their doping …Admit it , appologize , serve suspension, pay fine, continue racing.
Trek Bikes must feel foolish about now…If you have worked in a Trek shop, you know what I speak of.

25082012

bikeboy999(21:12:42) :

Hey if the USADA is going to go back in history, I will be happy to see Steve Bauer get his gold medal. I seem to remember Grewal admitting to using asthma meds when he was not asthmatic. As for Lance’s life time ban, I read that it is because he was a supplier/dealer and not just user. The interweb has lots of interesting stuff on it. Oh and since we are complaining about drug tests. Why are “masking” agent users not banned and have medals/wins taking away. If so Steve Bauer gets third place and Pedro Delgado gets banned. And what evidence will the Spaniard’s spend tax money on to re-test big Mig? The whole thing is a crock, I think that TT from USADA is striking at Lance to prevent him from having a chance at running for office(if he was ever thinking it). And maybe with his unbelievable ‘success” with so called independent arbitrators. Is it possible that the guy gave up because he is a cancer survivor and this kind of stress could not be healthy for him?

Brian

26082012

Calvin(22:35:37) :

Kudos to Lazy for a gutsy blog entry. you know 50% of people disagree with you. some very strongly.
Ben, the reason for the lifetime ban is clearly explained on the USADA press release. in a word …. trafficking. (as well as multiple rules violated).
as is typical in other legal matters, using and trafficking are dealt with quite differently.

I wonder who was the kingpin of this whole Postal Service conspiracy. Lance may have just been the bag man. something made both the UCI and Lance make very public flip flops over this case. was it to keep the details quiet?
yes Vik, Bruyneel is the only wildcard left. if he flips will we ever learn the details?
I am definitely one of the small minded people that find this fascinating.

27082012

Richard(04:02:37) :

Love the blog!
But Lance is innocent until proven guilty. USADA should put up or shut up. To date all they have done is run a smear campaign.

Lazy – I agree with your post. I think it was a gutsy move for the USADA to go after Lance and I’m certain that they didn’t make a lot of friends doing so.

I don’t follow pro road cycling even as a cyclist. Like many (or all?) pro sports, dishonesty seems to be an honored tradition. I couldn’t care less about it.

Many people speculate on whether or not Lance actually doped, or if he just gave up the case because he was tired of it. I personally agree with your point that he wouldn’t have backed down unless there was something to hide. I just don’t see it being even a remote possibility that Lance didn’t dope. He obviously wasn’t the only one, but they wanted to take him down because he is the “big fish” of the sport. I would like to think that pro cycling will clean up its act, but I know that will never completely happen. Who cares though? Pro road racing doesn’t define cycling as a whole.

I do think that Lance has done some other work that is honorable. His fight with cancer and his organization have done a lot of good, so he deserves credit for that.

Love your blog! However, I disagree with the USADA going after Lance. First, unless I am advising the party in “power” I never advise clients to submit to binding arbitration. Why? The lack of constitutional protections as to the evidence (no veracity and everything (regardless of credibility (or even truth)) comes in and is considered by the arbitrators is one reason. Concur that the witnesses have an interest in making this statement.

When I have participated in rather high dollar and importance level type of arbitration – you’d be shocked at what’s allowed in. So, to me this is a little too late and seemingly is biased. They did have their chance to “catch” him and couldn’t. Game over. Changing what is allowed in a decision-making forum and letting in all evidence regardless of the veracity is ridiculous. And, makes us look like ridiculous Americans that must win. As usual.

@Pam – if you want to compete as a US pro cyclist you accept WADA and USADA oversight of your sporting activities. LA had a choice to accept arbitration or accept a guilty verdict. There is no 3rd option no matter how LA’s legal team wants to paint it. You don’t get to decide you don’t want to participate in the process just because it’s not favourable to you. If that was an option no doper would participate.

27082012

Ben(10:41:15) :

@Calvin, I find the trafficking/distribution charge the only one difficult to believe. Lance may be an a-hole but he is very smart. He is not going to be the team pharmacist/biochemist. But hey a whole bunch of guilty doper’s, many of which were no longer on his team when they were busted (and surely passed along nothing they had learned), were told they could go free if they said he was, so there shouldn’t be any trouble convincing the jury… oh wait. It seems the USADA believes LA invented doping, everyone else is just an innocent victim of his teachings. Naive and ridiculous.

27082012

Darrell(10:50:11) :

Hi Vik,

I can understand why he effectively threw in the towel. How many times can you prove something did not happen? Even if he would win this round then the next government alphabet agency goes after him again. The feds could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it so the USADA comes in and makes up its own rules as it goes along. The USADA was supposed to limit the time frame to 8 years. However they went back on LA for 14 years and they are now redoing their rules for 14 years retroactively. How would you feel if you were in a race and each time you were winning the competitors changed the rules making sure you always lost regardless of what you did? The entire USADA case is where they are the prosecutor, judge and jury. The closest thing us mere mortals come to this is if the IRS comes after you. You are guilty until you prove your innocence. Again it is harder to prove an action did not take place that one that did. While it is popular to bash Armstrong I am not going to. His case is not fair because no one can effectively fight against arbitrary ankle biting bureaucrats that are out to get you no matter what the truth really is. Rather than wasting any more time, money and energy on something he cannot win he is focusing his efforts on things he can have a chance of success at. As far as loosing his TDF races that is not for USADA to decide because they did not issues those awards. Even if the wins were vacated who would get them? Another doper that was actually caught with drugs rather than Armstrong who was by hearsay implicated with no proof. BTW when LA was doing most of his races the USADA was not even in existance.

27082012

Calvin(11:23:44) :

@Ben Dr.Ferrari (an EPO specialist and long time friend of Armstrong) was the Pharmacist. The evidence may include the $450,000 personal check from Armstrong to the good doctor. Either LA had a heck of a monkey on his back or he was a dealer. at this time there is still no blood or urine test for dealers.
No one went free, except maybe Hincapie.
Actually it was Lance’s “long time friend and trusted advisor” that was a pioneer in epo abuse for sports.
If domestiques were threatened or forced to dope, the captain shares some responsibility. In fact, anyone who doesn’t speak up shares the responsibility.

I wish we could get past all the little BS and find out how far the corruption goes up the ladder. who calls the shots for the UCI? obviously not McQuaid.

I lost interest in racing long ago as it was clear to me that I would only be a spectator. And as a spectator, I can’t imagine regaining my interest, given the back-biting, second-guessing and bureaucratic infighting that surround the sport. In spectating, all is marketing and gray areas. In riding one’s own bike, the world is a more hopeful place. Though I am thinking of growing sideburns again.

@Darrell – you can prove something that didn’t happen by rebutting the evidence that it did. If 10+ people are willing to testify that they saw you dope or you told them you doped you’d have to explain why their testimony was not accurate. If Lance was innocent there would be no evidence or the evidence would be easily shown to be bogus.

Let’s face it if you think Lance is innocent than you have to believe there is a concerted conspiracy against him. If you can believe that than you can suggest that a conspiracy to engage in systematic doping at US Postal in order to gain millions of dollars and huge celebrity status is a totally crazy accusation. When you look at what USADA has to gain from going after LA and what LA had to gain from doping it’s pretty clear that LA had a heck of a lot more motivation.

If there was no evidence against him Lance would have won his case and the matter would have been over. Personally I can’t take the idea that LA decided to accept a guilty verdict and be banned for life because there was no credible evidence and he didn’t want to spend any more time on the subject.

If you ask me what happened was LA sat down with his lawyers and war gamed what evidence they had against him and what his likely outcome was if he fought the charges or if he gave up and accepted the ban. By not fighting the charges the witness testimony stays under wraps and LA can continue suggesting the USADA didn’t have a solid case – despite the total lack of logic that would entail.

Reblogged this on Kitesurf Bike rambling and commented:
Lazy Rando puts it all together on his blog …. Pharmstrong debate as strong as ever ….
Lance Armstrong decided not to fight the charges the USADA brought against him and was found guilty of doping and banned from the sport for life. His Tour de France wins may be stripped from him as well as his other wins from that era. You can click on the image above to read an article over at Velonews on the subject. By not fighting the charges he avoided having all the testimony against him end up in the news and managed to save his image to some degree. He knows what the folks who were going to testify would say and his lawyers would have advised him what his chances were at coming out of that process without being found guilty. One thing you gotta agree on about LA is that he surrounds himself with experts and uses their advice to make smart choices.

As for the issue of his doping past it’s not a surprise to anyone who watched the pro racing of that era. Almost every other contemporary with a shot at the podium at the Tour has been found guilty of doping. In the current peleton Contador has been stripped of his last Tour win and a Shleck has been charged with doping. To believe LA was one of the only top pros not doping despite all of this and a retinue of witnesses ready to testify for the USADA is ridiculous. On the other hand it does change the landscape within which we judge LA’s actions. Everybody was doing it. It’s still going on today.

Kudos to the USADA for having the courage to go after Lance. With the UCI, the US Government and the US public behind LA that was a brave choice. Building a case by collecting evidence through witness statements and uncovering documents is far harder than getting a doping positive, but as we’ve seen the professional cycling peleton can take a load of doping products and pass all sorts of laboratory controls without getting caught. The guys that do get caught didn’t start doping that morning just before the race. They were doping for a while and finally didn’t follow the right protocols of dosage and timings or got surprised by a test they weren’t expecting. So when LA gives his “I was the most tested athlete in the peleton.” speech I just roll my eyes and my inside voice says “With the best doping doctors in the world on your staff.” USADA charged that LA’s team had managed to get a TdeF doping positive suppressed back in 1999. I hope we hear what happened in that case. It might shed more light on how LA kept things rolling for so long without getting caught. It might also explain why the UCI was so unhappy with USADA’s pursuit of LA; they may well be implicated in the cover up.

It’s funny when you read folks criticizing the USADA for taking up the LA case as if they are doing it to an innocent man for some evil reason. On one hand you have a pro athlete in a sport rife with doping who can help himself and his team generate millions of dollars of profit as well as build himself up as a huge celebrity on the other you have some guys at the USADA paid modest salaries who are responsible for enforcing the WADA code. They will never be famous, they won’t make millions and they’ll make a lot of enemies in the process of pursuing LA. Not to mention they have to face two panels of independent arbitrators with their evidence including the at the well respected CAS if the athlete challenges the charges. Note that LA didn’t want to face these arbitrators and have them hear the evidence which is why he gave up the fight.

Will this change anything? One benefit of Lance getting banned is that the doping fairy tale of LA’s career won’t be there to let young racers fool themselves into thinking they’ll get away with doping if they are smart about it. On the other hand people are greedy and they want fame and fortune. In a challenging sport like cycling there will always be the temptation to cheat by doping. We continue to charge and convict murderers even though we know it won’t stop folks killing other folks. Doping won’t stop in cycling, but the more energy we spend fighting it the less successful doping will occur.

27082012

Richard(13:30:10) :

Justice has taken on a new face in the US, if the US authority “knows” you are guilty,then you are and the rules are changed to support that. They filled Guantanamo Bay with “guilty” people who never got trials! Give him a real trial with real burdens of proof or stop muddying the water with allegations and calling them facts!

@Richard – the USADA only charged LA with doping. Lance decided to accept the guilty rap himself without going through with any defence. He could have defended himself against the evidence in front of an independent set of arbitrators and if he didn’t like their judgement he could have appealed to the CAS in Switzerland and have another opportunity to defend himself.

He didn’t want to face the evidence. He accepted the guilty verdict.

27082012

Ben(18:05:32) :

@Calvin I was unclear I meant pharmacist as a dispensary role per the charges. You can assume LAs relationship with Ferrari involved doping but again no evidence for or against. I can assume active cyclists were given deals to not lose their livelihood in exchange for telling the USADA it was all LAs idea and he gave them drugs.
Now people were threatened and forced to dope and the captain shares responsibility? Let’s see Tyler was a captain, hmmm Floyd too, Riis, and Ullrich. I guess Postal/Discovery/Shack were somehow unique in their approach that justifies the different penalty.
I guess its good that Lance gave Ferrari that big fat check since being a doctor with only one patient is not very lucrative :)
Agreed that the UCI needs to get its house in order.

28082012

Richard(03:57:14) :

Vik, I’ll just add my last comment as this affair is only ours to comment on while the topic is hot and is not for us to decide. Your comment that Lance is guilty because he chooses not to defend himself, paints every child who is bullied in the schoolyard as guilty if they do not choose to fight the bully and I believe neither of us accept that as true!
Keep up the great work on the blog!
Kind Regards
Richard

Richard – Lance is guilty because that’s the result of deciding not to fight the charges. If you could dope and then when you got charged simply not defending yourself was a way to escape guilt than every single doper would simply not participate and proclaim their innocence. Lance isn’t some weak helpless child. He is a smart, rich man with access to the best lawyers in the world.

Hi Vik,
It’s kind of interesting where we draw the lines with regard to doping. Carbo-loading, caffeine, power drinks, and then the somewhat-scary category that approaches the “illegal” zone, and then steroids/PED/cocaine/EPO/blood doping/etc…
What I don’t like about these cases is that we love to watch the big boys fall. I suspect that almost all of even the little fish are doped as well, but many of us believe in the fairly tale that a “Tourminator” has held them down. Sure, many would say that it’s “great” that we’ve now “gotten” Armstrong, but aren’t most competitive cyclists officially sufferers of asthma or on some sort of legal corticosteroid? Isn’t that one hell of a problem?
Yes, big bad brash LA — as he’s known by many over here in Germany — was most likely doped (big surprise)…but seven titles in a row is still one hell of an accomplishment. He is still quite the competitive cyclist in terms of mental and physical strength and strategy (not defending him…just making an objective comment ;-) I suppose the point here is comparable to the one about Barry Bonds. Even though he illegally increased his strength (and his helmet size!), it still takes one heck of an athlete to hit so well and so consistently for so long. My two cents…
Regards,
Hank

Hank – What constitutes doping is an interesting question. We have rules in place that specify what substances and practices [ie. blood transfusions] are illegal. If you look at doping sanctions in cycling riders at every level of the peleton are being caught as well as amateur riders as well from time to time. The focus is on the top riders because they are the ones who wins races and benefit most from cheating. Those top riders are great athletes whether they dope or not. Having said that I think it’s pretty clear given the competition for the win at the main pro races that doping is a king maker. The guy that comes in 6th is still an amazing athlete, but most causal cycling fans won’t know his/her name and he won’t be on magazine ads in.

Looking at it another way. LA gets to keep his millions, his fame and the collective memory of his 7 TdeF wins – despite being found guilty. In many ways the benefits of his victories cannot be undone.

Great blog post! Being danish, and a former triathlete/duathlete, I actually thought it was a sad day when Bjarne Riis won TdF in 1996 – such huge improvements over a couple of years just don’t happen unless you’re just starting out as a rookie cyclist, and it was clear without doubt that he was doped (he had the nickname Mr 60 percent due to his ridiculous high hematocrit values). It took him 11 years to admit he was cheating.

And then we got Armstrong.

You guys who advocate that the athletes should be allowed to dope freely obviously can’t have kids. What should I go telling my kids? “Train hard, dope as much as you think your body can handle without to much detrimental effect on your long term health, or go big: If you want to get to the top of the podium, you’ll have to go all in, it’s worth it, even if it might kill you in the long run.”

I think not.

I can’t tell you have great I think it is to see Armstrong, or any other cheater, being faced with their drug use, just like any other cheater in any other context (fake diplomas etc). Think about all the young talented riders who never got the career they could have had because they refused to cheat.